Rios was hurt last year and only played in 128 games last year and his power tailed off at the end of the year. Rios was very close to being a Dodger and Phillie. Would I trade Alex Rios? No unless it was for top notch pitching. In the Padres case, Chris Young or Germano.
I agree Reefer, I can't see how the Jays would or could trade Alex Rios. He's a young, power hitting outfielder with a whole lot of potential. I think he'll be a Blue Jay for quite some time, or at least until he becomes elligible for Free Agency.
FRESNO STATE SCHEDULE
v. Sacramento State W 24-3 (1-0)
@ (25) Texas A&M L 47-45 3 OT's (1-1)
@ Oregon L 54-21 (1-2)
v. Louisiana Tech W 17-6 (2-2, 1-0)
@ Nevada W 49-41 (3-2, 2-0)
@ Idaho W 37-24 (4-2, 3-0)
v. San Jose State W 30-0 (5-2, 4-0)
v. Boise State L 34-21 (5-3, 4-1)
v. Utah State W 38-27 (6-3, 5-1)
@ Hawaii L 37-30 (6-4, 5-2)
v. Kansas State W 45-29 (7-4, 5-2)
@ New Mexico State
I about busted a gut on that one!Originally Posted by love_that_reefer
Are you serious?
I'm sure the Blue Jays would trade Rios for a guy we just picked up off of waivers!
Lay down the pipe and back away slowly man!
Boy,way to about face!
I've been saying for two days that they won't trade him in response to "your" statement above,you've been disagreeing with me all along,then all of a sudden you say you wouldn't trade him if you were the BlueJays?
ADD kicking in?
I said I wouldn't trade unless it was for top notch pitching which means yes I would trade him. Reading is fun to do. Might want to try it out sometime. My thoughts are those of the Blue Jays. They didn't make a trade with the Dodgers because the Dodgers would not throw in a player along with Billingsley. Not only was Rios shopped this past offseason, he was shopped in the one before. You have missed the entire point which is that he isn't an untouchable.
Oh yeah, Germano has big league stuff and is doing well. The fact that you picked him up on waivers means nothing. Phillies messed up in the waiver process. So you can laugh at Young and Germano all you want buddy boy
Who's laughing at Young and Germano?I said I wouldn't trade unless it was for top notch pitching which means yes I would trade him. Reading is fun to do. Might want to try it out sometime. My thoughts are those of the Blue Jays. They didn't make a trade with the Dodgers because the Dodgers would not throw in a player along with Billingsley. Not only was Rios shopped this past offseason, he was shopped in the one before. You have missed the entire point which is that he isn't an untouchable.
Oh yeah, Germano has big league stuff and is doing well. The fact that you picked him up on waivers means nothing. Phillies messed up in the waiver process. So you can laugh at Young and Germano all you want buddy boy
I was laughing at your post saying the Jays should trade Rios to the Padres for Germano?
You don't think it's funny saying Rios isn't worth more than a Rookie #5 Starter who was picked up off waivers?
AND AGAIN,why would you be on a trade rumors thread talking about how Rios was available "LAST YEAR"?
I never disputed he was available last year......thought you were talking about something relevant to the thread.....sorry!
If we could get Rios for Germano.........I'd say, where/how the F*CK do we sign that deal ??? CY.....arguably a staff ace.......no thanks
I was saying Young and Germano but put "or" instead of "and" and now I look the fool, I got itSorry but I thought I was being relevant to this thread because you seemed to think he is untouchable which he is clearly not. Why would you think he was untouchable when he has been on the market for the past two years? Not to mention they sunk all their money in Wells. He is clearly available for the right price!!!! Wait a minute....all this is relevant
If you meant to say "and" then it makes more sense.
But,what you started this off saying was that they should trade him for some "young arms".
Above is where "I" said it would take a #1 starter.Which,is why I stated he is untouchable.The name of the Game is pitching.NO TEAM will trade a #1 Starter.If they even think about it it is because he no longer "is" a #1.
Anyway,too much time discussing a guy the Padres will never get.
It may be that Bradley was acquired only because he came so cheap and he may help in the Playoffs and next year.We haven't traded away anyone of consequence,so in theory,could still be looking for a hitter.It's obvious the Reds and ChiSox have asked for too much.That could change as the deadline approaches and no one gives in to their demands.I think,if it is at all possible,the Padres should get one of these guys,and not for the obvious reasons.Yes,we need the offense.But even more so we need the "threat" of offense.A guy like these in the middle of the order worries pitchers.It changes their gameplan.It also makes them throw to Agon.Do you not think his struggles have something to do with tthe fact he's our ONLY "consistent" threat?
Maybe even more important than all that,if we don't get one of these guys(or maybe even if we do),the Dodgers will.These hitters will have a two-fold effect.If we get Dye.....the Dodgers can't.Or vice-versa!
Personally I'd rather see the extra hitter on our Club,and I'd rather it be Dunn because of his age and he is healthy.This is assuming he signs an extension.The good thing is we lead the Division without either of these guys.Unfortunately,this may be the same reason we don't get either!
Definition of untouchable= Miguel Cabrera, not Alex Rios. I doubt the Dodgers would be sweating much if the Padres got Jermaine Dye and I doubt the Dodgers want Dye when they have many options for the OF.
The Dodgers need offense more than we do.If they can't find a thirdbaseman,they will take an outfielder.
Actually no the Dodgers don't but that's not the point. Dye is having a terrible year and the Dodgers have plenty of options in the OF. Dodgers have a lot of pieces to go get someone who isn't a rent-a-player. Dodgers have Abreu and Nomar at third now with Loney playing first. This will help boost their offense until a real solution comes around. Better looking options in a trade for the OF than Dye but like I said they have many options for the OF as is.
I don't think the Dodgers have many options for the OF. There is the issue of how they plan on splitting time in RF between Ethier and Kemp, but neither Gonzo nor Pierre will be on the bench anytime soon. I do agree that Dye is terrible. He hasn't been hitting well even at Comiskey Park. How is he going to fare batting in half of his games at Dodger Stadium? Or Petco Park?
OK, maybe not many but Ethier and Kemp have more upside than Dye and one of them can be packaged for someone better than Dye or perhaps someone to replace Schmidt and get Tomko out of there. Thanks for chiming in!
The Dodgers are better off keeping their young talent (a la Matt Kemp, Tony Abreu, Andre Etheir, James Loney) than moving 2 or 3 of those pieces for a Jermaine Dye. I think the Dodgers would actually get worse if they made such a move.
FRESNO STATE SCHEDULE
v. Sacramento State W 24-3 (1-0)
@ (25) Texas A&M L 47-45 3 OT's (1-1)
@ Oregon L 54-21 (1-2)
v. Louisiana Tech W 17-6 (2-2, 1-0)
@ Nevada W 49-41 (3-2, 2-0)
@ Idaho W 37-24 (4-2, 3-0)
v. San Jose State W 30-0 (5-2, 4-0)
v. Boise State L 34-21 (5-3, 4-1)
v. Utah State W 38-27 (6-3, 5-1)
@ Hawaii L 37-30 (6-4, 5-2)
v. Kansas State W 45-29 (7-4, 5-2)
@ New Mexico State
Posting Permissions
Baltimore Orioles
Boston Red Sox
New York Yankees
Tampa Bay Rays
Toronto Blue Jays
Chicago White Sox
Cleveland Indians
Detroit Tigers
Kansas City Royals
Minnesota Twins
Houston Astros
LA Angels
Oakland Athleticss
Seattle Mariners
Texas Rangers
Atlanta Braves
Miami Marlins
New York Mets
Philadelphia Phillies
Washington Nationals
Chicago Cubs
Cincinnati Reds
Milwaukee Brewers
Pittsburgh Pirates
St. Louis Cardinals
Arizona Diamondbacks
Colorado Rockies
Los Angeles Dodgers
San Diego Padres
San Francisco Giants
Register To Reply
